On Sun, 18 Jan 2009, Greg Lindahl wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 08:10:43PM -0500, Mark Hahn wrote:
>>> The question was raised as "When should all these servers be upgraded or replaced again?"
>>>> 3-5 years, IMO. if you replace hardware in <3 years, you're obviously
>> burning money.
>> After factoring in rent and utilities, my replacement time is < 3
> years. So what's obvious to you doesn't seem very obvious to me!
Right. There are rules of thumb, but they are based on assumptions, and
if the assumptions aren't applicable they will lead to non-optimal
behavior. The right rule is "do the cost-benefit analysis and act
according to what it tells you". Which will, in fact, often lead to 3-5
year replacement cycle. But additional costs along the way alter the
landscape, shifting to different replacement cycles.
To do the computation correctly, you have to include all sorts of
marginal costs and benefits. For example, sometimes there are nonlinear
benefits to finishing work faster, which favors shorter cycles.
Sometimes there are nonlinear costs (or higher than normal linear
costs, which ALSO favors shorter cycles.
On the other hand, if somebody else pays for the power, and you have no
source of money to buy replacement nodes, you run nodes until they die.
All the "usual" CBAs assume a constant flow of support moneys for new
nodes, and that is not always the case.
rgb
>> -- greg
>>>> _______________________________________________
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf>
Robert G. Brown Phone(cell): 1-919-280-8443
Duke University Physics Dept, Box 90305
Durham, N.C. 27708-0305
Web: http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb
Book of Lilith Website: http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/Lilith/Lilith.php
Lulu Bookstore: http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=877977